HE averaged 10 points on .40% shooting last year and is a career .44% shooter. We don't need him--if he couldn't make an impact on the Wolves, Suns, and Heat why do ppl think he could make an impact on a very structured playoff team?

...because it's a very structured playoff team, with other stars and quality players around him?

He wouldn't be the first player that excelled playing with great players....

He hasn't shown that he can score when he has had the opportunity to be the top scorer so logically, in a structured environment, he will struggle with less touches and less shots.

We have better 3's and better4's than him he is not needed....we need a 2 or a backup center.

If that is logic, then I don't think you and I can have a conversation, lol.

I will try, though, to show why I disagree with that as "logic".

The go-to player (let's say Lebron) faces constant pressure from the defense. This is typically done by putting the other team's best defender on the individual, while also having the rest of the defensive team focusing on said offensive player, so that they may help if and when it is needed. Similarly, the go-to offensive player faces constant pressure from the rest of the offensive team, in that he must score. He must create good looks. He must, he must, he must. That's a lot of pressure.

Now let's contrast that with a non-go-to player (Battier? Chalmers? Bosh?) on the same team. They are typically taking shots without a defensive player draped all over them. These players are able to catch the ball, usually in their comfort zones, and just shoot it, or make a simple "move" and then shoot. And even if there is a player defending them rather well, it's typically a one-on-one scenario, as the rest of the defensive team is not as focused on help defense with this group. Lastly, this group does not (or rather, should not) feel any additional pressure from his team, as that falls, as mentioned, on the primary scorer. This secondary option may shoot and score if open/needed, but doesn't need to feel the pressure to create something. That allows him to pass the ball when things look inefficient and/or bleak.

To bring this back to the Bulls... Rose demands the defensive attention, and the offensive pressure. Beasley would have been one of those players, like Bosh, that is able to pick and choose his places. Hopefully his choice would be one of the highest probability shots, thus giving himself the best opportunity to succeed.

If that is logic, then I don't think you and I can have a conversation, lol.

I will try, though, to show why I disagree with that as "logic".

The go-to player (let's say Lebron) faces constant pressure from the defense. This is typically done by putting the other team's best defender on the individual, while also having the rest of the defensive team focusing on said offensive player, so that they may help if and when it is needed. Similarly, the go-to offensive player faces constant pressure from the rest of the offensive team, in that he must score. He must create good looks. He must, he must, he must. That's a lot of pressure.

Now let's contrast that with a non-go-to player (Battier? Chalmers? Bosh?) on the same team. They are typically taking shots without a defensive player draped all over them. These players are able to catch the ball, usually in their comfort zones, and just shoot it, or make a simple "move" and then shoot. And even if there is a player defending them rather well, it's typically a one-on-one scenario, as the rest of the defensive team is not as focused on help defense with this group. Lastly, this group does not (or rather, should not) feel any additional pressure from his team, as that falls, as mentioned, on the primary scorer. This secondary option may shoot and score if open/needed, but doesn't need to feel the pressure to create something. That allows him to pass the ball when things look inefficient and/or bleak.

To bring this back to the Bulls... Rose demands the defensive attention, and the offensive pressure. Beasley would have been one of those players, like Bosh, that is able to pick and choose his places. Hopefully his choice would be one of the highest probability shots, thus giving himself the best opportunity to succeed.

Bosh (in Toronto), Battier (pretty much everywhere), and Chalmers (on the Heat and at Kansas), are all cagey, heady players who have proven themselves to have the type of mettle that can add to a championship team.

Beasley was drafted by the Heat and did not perform well enough for them to even give him a chance to improve. He has been on teams where he had the chance to be a featured scorer, 2nd guy, and complimentary guy and has failed to impress at every turn.

The Bull's offense is not run-and-gun, unless you're #1. Otherwise you will have to get looks within a STRUCTURED offense (with some drive and dish).

-He is a poor shooter percentage wise
-he lacks discipline
-He smokes weed and does not make smart plays (which is not what you want in a spot player)
-he will play behind Deng, Dunleavy, Boozer and Taj.

Those things are what "logically" make me think that he would not be a good move for the BUlls (that and we ave no cap space for him, and what money we have needs to be spent on a RELIABLE scorer or backup center.

To simplify my earlier assumption, if he could not be an effective scorer with carte blanche and many shots, how would he be effective on a team that will only get him a few shots a game and with a coach that will bench him for playing poor defense?

Is there no logic that assumption (mind you my rhetoric-- *ASSUMPTION)

Chris Bosh was a top scorer in Toronto but in Miami he has less shots and less opportunity to get going....he is a much more effective scorer than Beasley and sometimes struggled to make an impact with his scoring because he was used to having all the shots he needed to feel comfortable.

But I believe that a troubled player needs nothing less than a structured environment. And for someone that struggles with poor shot selection, a more structured environment could (again) help in that regard.

I would rather take a flier on someone with all the talent in the world, that is still young, and still has loads of potential.... than to sign a Kirk Hinrich (I know we didn't sign him this year, but it's a good example). A player that is-what-he-is, and while a useful player, you already know exactly what you get from him, and you know that it won't put you over the top.

But I believe that a troubled player needs nothing less than a structured environment. And for someone that struggles with poor shot selection, a more structured environment could (again) help in that regard.

I would rather take a flier on someone with all the talent in the world, that is still young, and still has loads of potential.... than to sign a Kirk Hinrich (I know we didn't sign him this year, but it's a good example). A player that is-what-he-is, and while a useful player, you already know exactly what you get from him, and you know that it won't put you over the top.

I'm just not sold on Beas fitting into our team concept. I think one of our strengths, well our biggest strength is team defense. If one cog doesn't work it throws the whole system out of wack.

Add that to the fact that Beas doesn't rebound well for his position and his game just turns me off. I'd rather go after a guy like OJ Mayo (who I think we should have reached for) or one of the young 2-guards in the league.

I am of the thinking that we need a backcourt scorer that can handle the pill and shoot threes more than anything else [to take the pressure off of Rose].

I'm just not sold on Beas fitting into our team concept. I think one of our strengths, well our biggest strength is team defense. If one cog doesn't work it throws the whole system out of wack.

Add that to the fact that Beas doesn't rebound well for his position and his game just turns me off. I'd rather go after a guy like OJ Mayo (who I think we should have reached for) or one of the young 2-guards in the league.

I am of the thinking that we need a backcourt scorer that can handle the pill and shoot threes more than anything else [to take the pressure off of Rose].

I see your point(s) as well though--nice debating with you sir...

AGreed there. That's our biggest need.

But I say our second biggest need (or our biggest need, but more generalized than that) is a player whose sole role is to score. We have the defensive structure in place. I want a "free lance" guy that can score. Melo would be ideal, IMO. But that's a HUGE pipe dream.

We are talking about a player commanding 1 MILLION What you going to get for that? Hes not injured and has scored 29 / 9 in college.

AND i would like to add that he is playing +Per in preseason scoring 1 point per minute in game on high FG% it looks to me like theory is wrong the guy was a steal and nobody even bit.. Star players dont swap around so easily they have to fuq up and he did so this is how you get em on the roster for nothing.

We are talking about a player commanding 1 MILLION What you going to get for that? Hes not injured and has scored 29 / 9 in college.

AND i would like to add that he is playing +Per in preseason scoring 1 point per minute in game on high FG% it looks to me like theory is wrong the guy was a steal and nobody even bit.. Star players dont swap around so easily they have to fuq up and he did so this is how you get em on the roster for nothing.

1. College means nothing at this point.
2. He also injured himself in the preseaon and still doesn't stick d
3. There is a reason no one bit--it is because dude is unstable and a risk. NOt worth the risk for us when we have two small forwards and two power forwards better than him.....we need to save that spot/money for a wing scorer or backup center.